[p. 482]
|482| necessity of war is posited for the shape and individuality of the ethical totality, which – because in it there is the free possibility that not only individual determinacies but the completeness of them as life is annihilated, and indeed for the absolute itself or for the people – preserves the ethical health of the peoples in their indifference to the determinacies and to their becoming habituated and fixed, just as the movement of the winds preserves the lakes from the putrefaction into which a lasting calm would put them, as a lasting or even perpetual peace would put the peoples.
With the negative of infinity just considered – because the shape of the ethical totality and its individuality are determined as an individuality directed outwards, and the movement of this as bravery – the other side is immediately connected, namely the subsistence of the opposition. The one is infinity, negative, as is the other; the first is the negation of the negation, the opposition against the opposition, the second the negation and opposition itself in its subsistence as determinacies or manifold reality. These realities in their pure inner formlessness and simplicity, or the feelings, are in the practical sphere feelings reconstituting themselves out of difference and passing through, out of the sublatedness of the differenceless self-feeling, an annihilation of intuitions, and restoring themselves – physical needs and enjoyments which, posited again for themselves in totality, obey, in their infinite entanglements, one necessity and form the system of universal reciprocal dependence with regard to physical needs and to labour and accumulation for them and – this as a science – the system of so-called political economy. Since this system of reality is wholly in negativity and in infinity, it follows for its relation to the positive totality,

Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.